August 6, 2009 Minutes

These minutes were posted by the Planning.

Pittsfield Planning Board
Town Hall, 85 Main Street
Pittsfield, NH 03263
Minutes of Public Meeting

August 6, 2009

ITEM 1. Called to order

Called to order by Chairman Gerard A. Leduc at 7:00 PM

ITEM 2. Roll call

Gerard A. Leduc (GL), Chairman, Bill Miskoe (BM), Vice Chairman, Fred Hast (FH) Selectman Ex Officio, Daniel Green (DG), Jim Pritchard (JP), Dan Schroth (DS), Rich Hunsberger (RH), Alternate Ted Mitchell (TM), Alternate Clayton Wood (CW), Denise Morin (DM) Alternate Selectman Ex Officio.

ITEM 3. Approvals of the Minutes of July 2, 2009

(BM) Motion to approve the minutes of July 2, 2009. (DS) Second.
.
(GL) is there any discussion?

(JP) reported that there are two sets of minutes. (BM) stated that his motion was on the one without Jim’s changes on the back. (DS) I would like to discuss this tonight. I would vote on the draft minutes without all the corrections. I don’t see how we are going to keep doing this week to week. (JP) It is still not clear which set of minutes we are voting on – the one with corrections or the one without. (RH) stated he had only one set of minutes. (DG) also stated he was missing a set of minutes. (BM) stated that the second set of minutes showed where Jim’s corrections were in the minutes. (JP) stated he did this as instructed by Gerard. (GL) stated this was done because it easier for the secretary to note the changes. (BM) I have one set of minutes with 10 pages and one with 12 pages. This is very confusing and I will have to sort through them. (FH) It is because of all the additions to the minutes. (DG) So, the changes were made and also put at the end of the minutes? (BM) They were inserted as annotated. (JP) Yes, they were inserted and annotated at the end. (BM) Does it show where the changes are in the text? (JP) I did it the way I was instructed to by Gerard. (DS) So the motion is on the ten page one? (BM) I don’t know which until I go through the minutes line-by-line to see where the changes are in the minutes. (JP) It says where the changes are. (DG) Normally we get the minutes and make corrections. (BM) I would request these minutes be tabled until the next meeting. I am withdrawing my motion. (GL) Dan, are you withdrawing your second? (DS) I guess so. (GL) I need a motion to table the minutes.

(BM) Motion to table the minutes till the meeting in September.
(DG) Second. Carried 6-0.

ITEM 4. New Businesses

A. Amenico Exemption

(DG) Motion to grant Amenico an exemption. (JP) Second.

Discussion: (BM) If we’re talking about Amenico, I would have to recuse myself. (GL) asked (CW) to take (BM’s) place.

(GL) Is there any discussion? (JP) When Amenico gave us their information for exemption, it was missing the information on parking. Since then they have given us the information stating that they have 8,000 sq. ft. This meets the requirements for parking. They also have ten additional parking spaces. Since the last meeting they meet the conditions. (FH) I got how the parking spaces are figured. At times, there are three people working at Marston transportation. Amenico has stated that they are planning to increase the number of employees to twenty. This will eat up the parking spaces by increasing the number of employees. (JP) The issue is what the zoning ordinance requires. Amenico covers 8,000 sq, ft. of floor space, which requires them to have ten parking spaces? This meets the zoning requirements. (FH) How much floor space is in the whole building? Who is Endicott Trading? How much floor space do they take up? How about the other businesses? This is why I felt we needed a Site Plan Review. (RH) The only business that had site plan reviews is no longer there. (GL) Is there any other discussion? (DS) I think we should grant them an exemption. I don’t think every parking space will be used all at once. (GL) I would like to bring this to a vote.

Vote: Carried 5-2 (FH) and (RH).

B. Letters from the Select Board.

(JP) recused himself. (TM) was asked to take his place.

(GL) asked BM to step down. (BM) asked on what grounds? (GL) felt it was a conflict of interest. (BM) Since the letter that was sent to the Select Board was on my motion, I would like to know where we are going with this. (GL) I am thinking of going into non-public session next meeting. (BM) I haven’t even seen these letters. I don’t know what this is all about. (RH) I think you should recuse yourself so we can discuss these letters. (BM) If I feel I have something to say about this, it is my duty to do so.

(BM) recused himself and (CW) took his place.

July 10th letter from the Selectman Board.

(GL) Let’s start with the July 10th letter. (RH) This letter is from the Select Board concerning if there are any ethical violations. (TM) The reason is that it is an elected board and not an appointed one. If it were appointed, they would deal with it. Since it was elected it should be sent to the Ethics Committee. (RH) I know something about ethics in that one should recuse himself if you’re an abutter. Since I don’t have the policy in front of me I cannot make up my mind. Bill forwarded Jim’s e-mail and some statements that they are unethical. (CW) There are two different things going on. The first is the e-mails sent to Bill. There is nothing unethical done by Jim just some heated language, possibly ill advised. (RH) If you read it, it has the flavor of being unethical noting that if Bill would vote in favor of Jim’s citizen petition, then he would ignore his dealings with Mr. Darrah. (DG) I think you should read it verbatim. (DS) I don’t see that this violates any code of ethics. (TM) The e-mails should have remained between the two of them. The thing that bothers me is what we haven’t discussed yet; I think we should give a stern warning to the Board member. Then if it happens again, then the Board remands it to the Ethics Committee. (CW) I think the Planning Board did an injustice to the Select Board. We gave them no evidence to go on. I was at that meeting and they had no choice but to kick it back to us. We had a chance to solve it and it got totally out control. Several times it was brought up at the meeting. What was the violation? (RH) If you send me a letter first- class mail and you put on it confidential and I show it to anyone. (CW) Show me the law. (DS) Do not send it to me, I will show it to the people. (RH) I feel you have the right to do what you what. (FH) We have a statement from an attorney, who works at the Local Government Center. If you were a company it would fall into play. (DG) Just because an attorney says something, it doesn’t make it true. (TM) I would like to make a point. This is a total mess. I would like to send a letter to the Ethics Committee and have it sent back to us. (DS) We can’t do that because two people have filed complaints with the Ethics Committee. I don’t think we need to discuss this any longer. (TM) I suggest that we have no more discussions unless the Ethics Committee kicks it back to us.

Letter of July 27, 2009

(DS) Malfeasance doesn’t go that far. (GL) I think that the Select Board is asking for our opinion on the second paragraph. (DS) I think we got a little lax. (CW) There is another issue, in that he talked to Mr. Darrah. (DS) I talked to Joe and I wished him luck when he comes in front of the Board. (TM) It was improper communication. (RH) We were told we should be a user-friendly board and that one-person subjection would change the outcome. It still has to come to one-person one-vote. (CW) If it sets a person’s expectations up, then it is wrong. It is clear to me that his expectations were set. He didn’t even follow the proper process. We made a simple job harder by setting up his expectations. (RH) It seems to me that you are going on hearsay that Bill might have talked to Joe. (CW) We should have a discussion when the people should recuse themselves. (FH) I can remember when a developer would come in front of the board and get a run around. That is why we went to a user-friendly board. Dunkin Donuts came in front of the Board. The Board would like to hear from DOT first. Then one member suggested it was retail. I said it was commercial. In two hours he left the meeting with the condition to meet with the DOT. Yes, that held him up for two months. (DG) What is the Select Board asking of us? (GL) They are asking our opinion.

(RH) Motion that the Select Board takes no action on the letter of
July 27, 2009, Re Pritchard / Miskoe. (DS) Second. Carried 6-1 (DG).

Jim Pritchard and Bill Miskoe returned to the board.

C. Darrah –Lighting

(GL) The reason this is on the agenda is that there was a problem with the lighting. It was brought to me by two complaints from citizens. (DG) The lights were blinding people. (GL) This light was not on the site plan.
(RH) So, Kyle got them removed.

D. Rules and Procedure

(GL) We never signed the Rules of Procedure. (JP) There is still some underlining. (GL) I don’t think that underlining the colon changes a thing.

(FH) Motion to sign the Rules of Procedure. (RH) Second. Carried 6-0. (DS) Abstains.

D. Planning Board Secretary Procedures

(GL) What does this Board expect of a secretary? (DS) This secretary got tired of all the corrections. (BM) I feel Dee Fritz did a good job. (GL) The minutes are supposed to be generic. The tapes are supposed to have the final say. (RH) Dee had gone to a workshop about what are the requirements for the minutes. I think she was doing a good job. (GL) What does this Board want in a secretary? (RH) Someone with experience. (FH) The Planning Board is going to hire the next secretary. (RH) I feel Dee was following the rules regarding minutes. When we get into 13 pages of corrections that is a little much. (DS) If we ask the next secretary to do it the way we have been doing it lately, I don’t think they will stay. (GL) I talked to Dee and she said it takes about eight hours to do the tapes. (JP) Dee did none of the corrections. I did. Do you understand, Gerard? (BM) I have a problem with deciding what the corrections should be. I have a problem with Jim’s transcription of the tapes and if what he presents is even true. That has caused a lot of problems. I don’t like that procedure. (DG) Not to defend anyone but has anything he corrected been wrong? Can you prove it? (JP) If Bill feels that the minutes shouldn’t be corrected, then he should not have signed the Rules of Procedure. It states that we can correct the minutes. (DS) Then I guess that we will not be able to keep a secretary. (BM) I have corrected minutes in the past. The process you established was counter- productive. (JP) I would like to remind Gerard that my marching orders came from him. (RH) The Board members should review the minutes. The minutes are an overview of the meeting.

(JP) The extensive corrections of the minutes are being caused by the attempts to have people removed from the board. (GL) What does the Board want in your next secretary? (RH) I have hired secretaries for other positions and I managed to hire good ones. If we interview someone who has the credentials for the job, hopefully we will find a good one. (BM) We better make it clear if we want the minutes word-for-word. We should make it clear what we are after. (RH) I believe it is the secretary’s job to take the minutes. It is our job to review the minutes. It is the Board members’ job to recommend changes to the minutes. It is our job to listen and accept or reject the changes. (DS) I would like to see this not happen all the time. (BM) You should tell them why the last one quit. (RH) We expect accurate minutes. (DS) Yes, when the Selectmen interview the next secretary. (FH) The Planning Board will be interviewing the next secretary. (RH) Then the Planning Board should pick two members to do the interviewing. (GL) I understand that is the way it will be. (RH) Then we should pick two members to do this.

(DG) Motion that the Planning Board Selectman rep., (JP) and (RH) do the interviewing of the possible secretary applicants. (BM) Second. Carried 6-0. (JP) abstained.

F. Advertising – New Secretary

(FH) You first have to figure out how much you’re going to pay them.
Denise Morin (DM), Selectman: The wage for this job runs between $10 and $11 per hour. In the budget, it is a $4,000 line. The Planning Board can use $2,500 of it. (GL) That line is the Planning Board/Zoning Board. (RH) I recommend that we advertise for the max. (DM) It should be in accordance with the qualifications of the applicant. (RH) It should state that this job is part-time. (BM) I noticed something on the bulletin board about this position. (RH) If we get three, we could do that in one night. (FH) I am planning to resign from the Planning Board. (RH) We should include a date.

ITEM 5. Selectman’s Report

(FH) We are working on the budget. (GL) I was at the Selectman’s meeting this week. They hired a person to help to try to bring business to our Town. He will first meet with the local businesses to find out the pluses and negatives of what they think about our Town. (DS) How many homes are in default?

ITEM 6. Building Inspector Report

(LK) reported for Kyle. He will be on vacation the week of the 17th.
(GL) Did the Selectman tell Kyle he didn’t have to attend the Board meetings? (LK) They stated he only needs to be here if something comes in front of the Board.

ITEM 7. Members Concerns

(DG) I don’t know if the rest of you got an e-mail from Dee. She stated she would still do the notices and the agendas. (GL) She will be doing everything but the Planning Board minutes.

(DG) Earlier this evening it was said that someone couldn’t be asked to recluse themselves from the board. Under RSA 617: 14 II, the Board can vote if the individual under question should be disqualified. Such a vote should be prior to or at the beginning of the public hearing. Such a vote should be held advisory and non-binding and may not be requested by anyone but Board members.

(JP) Requested to step down. (CW) took his place.

(BM) Doesn’t it say it is non-binding? (RH) We still have a vote. My take is that you take a vote; otherwise it could create a possible problem down the road. (BM) I would like to talk about some of the things Jim has said about me regarding not recusing myself on the Darrah application. He told the Board that it was because of prior business dealings. I brought that up before the hearing. I had two or three business dealings with Mr. Darrah. In the past two winters, I hired him to sand my driveway. I explained that to the Board. That was a business transaction. I didn’t think I had to recuse myself on that issue. What he was doing in Town at the time was different than that. So, I felt I could be impartial. Secondly, Jim has accused me of promising Mr. Darrah approval of his Site Plan. Mr. Darrah came to the Board with a poorly drawn plan showing a bigger building. The application shows a smaller building. This caused a re-noticing of the application. Joe had set up a building model to start on that date. Joe felt that he couldn’t get approval from the Board and asked should he go to another Town and build there? I said my position on this Board is to make decisions. We also have a duty to help out in guiding individuals through the regulatory process. Beware that I am but one vote on the Board. I can’t promise you anything. I looked at the site from the street. I looked at the zoning and at your corrected application. I feel that as it is done that this Board would approve it. I think I have recused myself more than anyone on the Board since March. Since the request for my removal didn’t go anywhere, it may be moot. I served on this Board since 2003. I took a short vacation of eight months. Then I came back on the Board. I recuse when needed. This is because Mr. Pritchard wants me off the Board for other reasons. (DS) Sounds right to me. (FH) The letter from the DOT said that his permit is valid till Sept. 26, 2009, and that the work be completed before that date. It was mentioned that he had another driveway permit. The Board went back and forth about that.

Another of the Planning Board mistakes was that you cannot go on anybody’s property without permission. (JP) It is the first issue that Fred is talking about. He had no driveway permit for the site plan that he was presenting. The issue came back to something he has proposed. If I had permission when I went over to talk to Mr. Darrah, I think I am okay there too Fred. (BM) Gerard, relative to going on people’s property, I looked at it from the street. I didn’t enter the property without permission. (RH) Fred, where did you read the date the driveway permit expires? (BM) The Town expects a site for the lot of land. I don’t think this Board has any control over States lines. (JP) The driveway permit is not the driveway on the site plan. (BM) The point is that this shouldn’t be our problem as to what happens on State property? Joe is out of compliance with Site Plan Regulations. He will do what the State wants anyway. (RH) I think what he is saying is that as the Planning Board, we can say that a driveway should be 100 ft. The State comes along and says it should be 50 ft. If it is over State property, we have no jurisdiction over it. (BM) Nobody said that it was done without the authority of the Board. An individual did go on the property. (JP) read Section 5, d3 and g6. (RH) It is my understanding that the State has addressed this issue. (JP) The issue is run-off. If the overall site is going to cause icing, that is the issue. (RH) My understanding is that it wasn’t constructed to State standards. (JP) The site plan that the Board approved would cause icing. We have expert opinion on that. That is why it should have been disapproved. (RH) It should have been approved with the condition that the State approved the driveway permit. (RH) The State is going to fix this. Their one issue is the driveway permit, which tells you there is a slope and how it should be constructed. (JP) The problem is that we have expert opinion that this would cause drainage problems. That is another problem. There is site plan approval and a driveway approval neither can have icing. (RH) He has to fix this with the State before it expires. (JP) Rich, this is why I didn’t have a problem once the conditions were put on it. I knew it was a practical matter even though the Board approved it. It doesn’t matter. The State will have it their way. (BM) We knew that the State would tell him. It didn’t concern the Board at that time. (JP) Our Site Plan Regulations are our business not the State’s business. They have their rules and we have ours. That is why I voted against it. (GL) I don’t remember seeing a letter sent from the DOT. (JP) Pardon me. (BM) The notices that got sent back. (GL) This could have solved it. (JP) It would have been a good idea. They expect the Chairman to call them. They try to keep up on these things by looking at the Planning Boards agendas. (GL) Would this Board agree at least that a State agency should be notified? (RH) I know a condition where that wouldn’t apply and that is this one where he had a driveway permit. He could build a driveway before seeking a site plan.
(JP) He didn’t do that. (FH) He had an amended driveway permit.

(FH) Asked to leave at 9:02PM.

ITEM 8. Work Session

(GL) There will be none tonight.

ITEM 9. Public Input

(JP) Bill Miskoe claims that he failed to report his business dealings with Mr. Darrah. That is not true. I believe he did on March 7, 2009. Mr. Miskoe reassured Mr. Darrah that the Planning Board would approve the Site Plan Review. Mr. Miskoe is legally disqualified from sitting on the Board. See RSA 617:1 for the reason he should not be seated. So, what he said in his e¬mail that “I don’t know if I said something out of place? I told Joe that his application was okay and assured him it would be approved if all he did was give him guidance.” When we got to the hearing it was obvious that Mr. Darrah was thinking he would sail through. I think that was one of the problems. I can’t understand it otherwise. Mr. Darrah was lead to believe everything was on automatic. Bill Miskoe didn’t think he had ever alluded to that. I told Joe that his application was okay and assured to be approved. Does Bill think this about business dealings? I didn’t mention his business dealings. That he had disclosed his business is a right-to-know. Evidently that he was doing something. He told that appellation was okay. That would disqualify you under the juror’s standard – end of story. (BM) I told them what I did. I said there was no reason it would not be approved.

ITEM 10. Adjournment

(DS) I make a motion to adjourn. (RH) I second the motion. Carried 7-0

APPROVED: October 1, 2009

_____________________________ _______________________
Rich Hunsberger, Chairman Date

I hereby certify that these Minutes were recorded by me and publicly posted on Aug 11, 2009.